You got that right! I buy a fishing license every year, even though some years I never make it fishing. One, it supports outdoor activities, and two, it covers me if I ever need rescue. It costs next to nothing.

My take is that if a SAR organization gets taxpayer dollars, then that's what they get. You don't get to bill in addition to that. If the tax money you get is not enough, ask for more tax money, or go private, bill for everything, and realize you will not get tax subsidies. You shouldn't be able to bill people that don't use your services (the vast majority of taxpayers) and also get to double-dip bill those who do. Pick the one you want to bill, and that's it. And you also have to realize that in the private world, you only get to bill those who want and ask for your services. If you go out looking for a lost hiker because you found their car in a parking lot, and they really weren't lost or in need of your help in the first place, then you don't get to bill them. It would be different if a relative/friend engaged your services to find the lost person. Then bill the person who retained you. But not if you are getting tax money for your response. You can't have it both ways.

There is a town here in Colorado that is now trying to bill out-of-towners for any fire department response if they are in a car accident. What they are finding, is that people are just avoiding their town (which happens to be a mountain touristy town, which nobody HAS to go through, but people can choose to). Soon enough, I think the town will decide that the head of the fire department that come up with this plan is a bonehead, and will get rid of them. That's my prediction.